Trump requests a new trial in E. Jean Carroll defamation case
Source: NBC News
March 5, 2024, 4:18 PM EST / Updated March 5, 2024, 5:58 PM EST
Donald Trumps attorneys on Tuesday filed a motion for a new trial in writer E. Jean Carroll's defamation case and asked a judge to cancel the judgment of $83 million against the former president.
In a federal court filing in New York, Trump attorneys Alina Habba and John Sauer wrote that a district court could grant a motion for a new trial because, they argued, relevant evidence had been excluded and the jury had been erroneously instructed on a key component of the case.
"This Courts erroneous decision to dramatically limit the scope of President Trumps testimony almost certainly influenced the jurys verdict, and thus a new trial is warranted," the attorneys wrote.
Efforts to restrict the scope of Trumps testimony "were erroneous and prejudicial," the attorneys added, citing when Trump took the stand and testimony about his state of mind when he made disparaging comments about Carroll was stricken from the record.
Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-requests-new-trial-e-jean-carroll-defamation-case-rcna141935
How many times has this been? I have now lost count.
Article finally updated.
Original article -
Donald Trumps attorneys on Tuesday filed a motion for a new trial in writer E. Jean Carroll's defamation case and asked a judge overseeing the case to cancel the judgment of $83 million dollars against the former president.
Trump attorneys Alina Habba and John Sauer argue that a district court may grant a motion for a new trial if the verdict is against the weight of the evidence. Habba also contended that the jurys compensatory and punitive awards are out of proportion and motivated by sympathy rather than evidence and should be canceled.
Carrolls attorney Roberta Kaplan declined to comment.
This is a developing story.
Irish_Dem
(47,144 posts)Threatening to take her back to court, etc.
riversedge
(70,248 posts)When Carroll's lawyer responds--if she does==I would say--suck it up big boy!!
Trump requests a new trial in E. Jean Carroll defamation case
Trump's attorneys argued that the jurys compensatory and punitive awards are out of proportion and should be canceled.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-requests-new-trial-e-jean-carroll-defamation-case-rcna141935
................
..................
"President Trumps testimony about his own state of mind is the most relevant and probative evidence on the issue of common-law malice, and he was uniquely positioned to address it," his attorneys wrote.
"By erroneously foreclosing any such testimonyand erroneously striking the one sentence of President Trumps testimony on this pointthe Court all but assured that the jury would make a baseless punitive-damages award," they added.
Trump's attorneys further argued that U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplans jury instruction on common-law malice was erroneous, because it "does not require a showing that intent to injury was the sole...motivation for the challenged statements" that they contend is required by New York law.
Carroll attorney Roberta Kaplan declined to comment on Tuesday's filing.
Trump's attorneys contended that the jurys compensatory and punitive awards are out of proportion and motivated by sympathy rather than evidence and should be canceled. They argued that the $11 million award for reputational harm "is disproportionately high" compared to similar cases and should also be canceled.
In their filing, Trump's lawyers cited case law that they indicated could reduce the total damages significantly to no more than $36.6 million.
Irish_Dem
(47,144 posts)He is saying if I take you back to court, you will get no more than $36 million.
Plus you will have legal fees and hassle as I threaten and bully you even more.
So take this offer or else.
RainCaster
(10,889 posts)He never pays his bills. Why should he start now?
Irish_Dem
(47,144 posts)No one says NO to Donald Trump.
orangecrush
(19,581 posts)On election day.
The voters can say no.
Bev54
(10,055 posts)Like the judges can't see right through this bullshit!
Response to Irish_Dem (Reply #1)
Bev54 This message was self-deleted by its author.
Lovie777
(12,290 posts)I am sick and tire of shithole's bullshit.
calguy
(5,316 posts)When he defames her again and she sues him a third time. That's the only way he gets back in Court with her.
And it's looking like he doesn't have the cash to put up to appeal the last decision against him. I think tomorrow is his last day to put up the money, otherwise Ms Carroll and her very competent lawyers will go shopping for which golf course motel they want to take away from him.
LetMyPeopleVote
(145,353 posts)Cadfael
(1,297 posts)Defendant President???
Do all his filings refer to him as such? How pathetic.
TwilightZone
(25,472 posts)Yes, his lawyers have been doing that in all the cases, as far as I know. I agree - it is pathetic.
melm00se
(4,993 posts)is supported.
"I am President and have total immunity and all my filings say that..."
Rhiannon12866
(205,552 posts)2naSalit
(86,651 posts)Gain positive ground in the court. I hope this sinks all of the "lawyers" involved.
getagrip_already
(14,766 posts)Lol.
Which do you think judge Kaplan, who has been pillaried, doxed, threatened, and disparaged, will choose?
Which do you think an appellate court would choose?
Yeah. Alina has a few ethical problems coming her way she should be more worried about.
Rebl2
(13,529 posts)a limit to how many times you can ask for retrial.
Ms. Toad
(34,076 posts)Novara
(5,844 posts)On Friday Ms. Carroll gets to pick a property she'd like to liquidate. Which one is (honestly) worth $83 million?
EndlessWire
(6,538 posts)I'd like to see a video of the taking down of Trump's name from the building or golf course.
SunSeeker
(51,574 posts)EndlessWire
(6,538 posts)but if it's real, I can't imagine why her children would allow her grave to become like that. Such utter disrespect. I don't think any of them are capable of love.
Unless she isn't there after all.
FakeNoose
(32,656 posts)That's probably who took the photo, one of the attendants. (that's my guess) Funny thing is, Ivana was cremated and her ashes are probably on somebody's mantle now. One of her kids maybe?
This gravesite is all for show anyway, plus it got Chump a large tax write-off. If she were really buried there, the Chump kiddies would have insisted on a nice memorial stone, if nothing else.
SunSeeker
(51,574 posts)Irish_Dem
(47,144 posts)Carroll Towers.
EndlessWire
(6,538 posts)I'd watch that video 50+ times!
Novara
(5,844 posts)EndlessWire
(6,538 posts)female can do to a guy's grifted empire.
OAITW r.2.0
(24,507 posts)Until he gets the results that he needs. Sorry TSF, that's not how our Courts work.
Midnight Writer
(21,770 posts)He is the kind of person that you can tell to not stare into the sun, and he will do it anyway just so he can prove he can't be told what to do.
Exactly the kind of man who is dangerous in leadership.
If his top people tell him it is insane to bomb Mexico or nuke a hurricane, will he do it anyway just to prove he is the big shot?
COL Mustard
(5,906 posts)Or run with scissors? Or stare into the sun? There must be something we can do to goad him.
Talitha
(6,597 posts)Hell, I'll even 'pretty-please' it - with sugar on top.
Evolve Dammit
(16,743 posts)TexasBushwhacker
(20,204 posts)Of course, he has shitty lawyers because he can't afford good ones.
SergeStorms
(19,204 posts)won't touch him with 7,000 mile pole.
He's a nightmare as a client, and then there's those little matters of not paying Attorneys who've represented him.
The "better" Attorneys didn't get "better" by being stupid. They'll all have too many paying clients already, or a conflict of interests.
The only Attorneys Trump can get now are those looking for publicity. It's either represent Trump, or buy ads on benches near bus stops.
SunSeeker
(51,574 posts)SCOTUS came up with that whole "Congress must be the one to enforce Section 3" lifeline to Trump without Trump's attorneys having even briefed it!
Girard442
(6,081 posts)...who will then vacate the judgements against him. No legit way that could happen, you say? Yeah, well...
EndlessWire
(6,538 posts)was the only one who could reduce damages? Didn't he already get turned down for a new trial? Isn't that asked for at the end of a trial, not when damages are due to be paid up?? It seems to me that, because Trump cannot pay, he's just trying to get out of the original court what he would otherwise have to ask of the appellate court--but he can't, because he hasn't got enough money.
I suppose any Judge can amend his own orders, but aren't they loathe to tamper with a jury finding? If the Orange Turd was not so vindictive, mean, and a big mouth, he could have avoided all of this by giving up the defamation of a woman he sexually molested. (I think it's rape, but we don't have to go there.)
The attorney is also entitled to be paid. This would be a hardship on the victim in this case. Maybe they can ask for further sanctions? Who's gonna pay that? Trump??
Ms. Toad
(34,076 posts)Both motions for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) and a motion for a new trial can be filed after the judgment is entered. I've lost track of what he filed earlier in which trial. But a JNOV would set aside the jury verdict (and you're right judges don't like to do that). A new trial would just be a do-over, but there is very little chance of that being granted. Both of those are motions to the original court. He can also file an appeal to a different (higher) court - and he is signalling that he believes there is a basis for an appellate court to lower the punitive awards. There are often limits on punitive awards.
Parties can't get sanctioned for filing motions they are entitled to file, unless the motion is so frivolous that there is no basis in law or fact for the motion (i.e. it has to pass the laugh test). The delay will add interest to what Trump will ultimately pay her.
DENVERPOPS
(8,838 posts)stall, stall, stall, delay, delay, delay.......wash, rinse, repeat....
Aussie105
(5,405 posts)This is Trump saying . . . Witch hunt! Not fair! Too much!
I want a do-over - and many more until I get the answer I want!
Stupid still thinks he is calling the shots!
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(108,061 posts)Autumn
(45,111 posts)Turbineguy
(37,353 posts)at least.
Ocelot II
(115,755 posts)cbabe
(3,549 posts)intheflow
(28,480 posts)Whos gonna tell him? 😂
SergeStorms
(19,204 posts)Just, no! Go take a long walk off of a short pier, Donnie. 🖕
Hotler
(11,428 posts)louis-t
(23,295 posts)What is this "new evidence"? Another Russian operative with another big lie? It's getting pretty old.
Ms. Toad
(34,076 posts)prodigitalson
(2,426 posts)BobTheSubgenius
(11,564 posts)"Habba also contended that the jurys compensatory and punitive awards are out of proportion and motivated by sympathy..."
Just like any courtroom win that Habba could ever hope for would be predicated on sympathy, rather than any astute legal work or argument.
BadgerMom
(2,771 posts)Its never over when its over. I read that the Biden team doesnt think Trump will accept defeat in November. No kidding. I hope they have some ideas about how to shut down his whininess. I am so, so sick of him. I can only imagine how E Jean Carroll feels.
onetexan
(13,044 posts)Or won't. The judge just needs to seize his assets and be done w his shenanigans.
mucifer
(23,554 posts)no_hypocrisy
(46,130 posts)A trial de novo is a new trial on an entire case, where both questions of fact and issues of law are determined as if there had been no trial in the first instance. A trial de novo is typically used to challenge awards found in arbitration and are supported by constitutional considerations. Indeed, while courts allow compulsory arbitration as a means of promoting expeditious resolution of smaller cases on the merits, they also must permit an unsuccessful party who participated in the compulsory arbitration to demand a trial de novo given the constitutional right to a jury trial.
Voltaire2
(13,079 posts)That he sexually assaulted her and then defamed her was already settled.
Ray Bruns
(4,098 posts)maxrandb
(15,336 posts)I know he won't, but a guy can dream, can't he?